Chattanooga Choo-choo! Muni fiber now offers 150Mbps

One of the most affordable cities in the United States just got another boost …

The fourth largest city in Tennessee is about to get the fastest municipally provided Internet and IP video service in the United States. Chattanooga's city-owned EPB Fiber Optics promises that its residents will soon be able to buy "Fi-Speed Internet 150"—fiber-to-the-home broadband with down and upload speeds of 150Mbps.

"The question we've all heard is 'when do we have the fiber at my house'?" EPB President Harold DePriest told the Chattanooga Times Free Presson Wednesday. "We will have all our customers in Chattanooga, East Ridge, and Red Bank served by the end of this month. And we will have all our customers throughout this system served by the end of this year."

No surprise

That puts Chattanooga ten years ahead of the Federal Communications Commission's National Broadband Plan, with its comparatively modest goal of 100Mbps for 260 million households by 2020. EPB, which also provides electricity to Chattanoogans, already offers that speed. The company's coverage area spreads out across 600 square miles of Chattanooga, Hamilton County, and various other counties in Southeast Tennessee and North Georgia.

"Though it may seem surprising to some, Chattanooga is light years ahead when it comes to advanced communications availability," bragged the city's mayor Ron Littlefield in a press release. This latest fiber rollout will cost EPB about $220 million and add an Internet-based smart grid system to the region.

None of this was welcomed by Chattanooga's incumbents, however, who filed lawsuits to stop the project. Our state-by-state map of attitudes towards muni-broadband indicates that Tennessee isn't the most hostile state to the concept, but it isn't the most accepting, either.

The cable companies and telcos charged that EPB was unfairly subsidizing some of its Internet/TV services with electricity utility revenue. A county court dismissed one suit filed by the Tennessee Cable Telecommunications Association in 2008. And the city, whose residents voted to approve the fiber initiative, also fought back with a public relations campaign, pledging that the project will serve as an investment magnet.

"The kind of network that is being built in Chattanooga today is exactly what companies like Google are imploring cities in this country to focus their efforts on," Littlefield added.

So now that there's some serious broadband competition in that region, what kind of choices do Chattanoogans have?

Get it all

EPB's service doesn't come cheap. We're guessing that a big chunk of its extant 9,600 customers buy the company's Fi-Speed Internet 15 plan (15Mbps), sold at $57.99 a month "excluding taxes and fees." Fi-Speed 20Mbps is $69.99 a month, followed by 50Mbps for $174.99 and 100Mbps for $349.99. No word yet what price tag EPB will put on 150, but we figure it will be pricey enough to fall into the "business broadband" category.

We looked up the tiers and rates for one of EPB's competitors, Comcast, and found plans that seem somewhat more affordable, at least at first glance. Comcast offers a tier of "up to" 12/2Mbps for $19.99. The fastest speed the cable company provides in that area is $99.95 for its "Extreme 50" service (50/10Mbps).

But that $19.99 tier is an introductory deal that goes up to $42.95 after six months, and all of Comcast's intro rates are for consumers who already buy Comcast cable or Comcast digital voice service.

Meanwhile, you can get EPB's "Get It All" Fi-Internet 20, Fi-Phone, and Fi-Cable TV plan for $130.36. Comcast's basic "Triple Play" plan is advertised at $99 a month for the first year, and eventually goes up to $129.99. We couldn't figure out what kind of Internet speed consumers get with this plan. All the relevant page says is that the service is "way faster than DSL."

Still, even if that "way faster" speed is only at Comcast's 12/2Mbps rate, it's all good news for the people of Chattanooga, who now have two carriers that serve up Internet at tiers that make telco/copper wire DSL look silly.

For example, the region's AT&T/BellSouth DSL offers speeds of up to 3Mbps. And Frontier Communications, which plans to roll out DSL to a significant portion of the South, has promised the FCC that it will provide at least 4Mbps to 85 percent of its newly purchased lines by the last day of 2015. That's 96Mbps short of the Commission's National Broadband Plan goal, and 146Mbps short of what EPB is now offering Chattanooga.

Forbes magazine already ranks the Chattanooga metropolitan area number eight on its list of "bang-for-the-buck" cities. Let's see where 150Mbps broadband puts the region two years from now.

Matthew Lasar
Matt writes for Ars Technica about media/technology history, intellectual property, the FCC, or the Internet in general. He teaches United States history and politics at the University of California at Santa Cruz. Emailmatthew.lasar@arstechnica.com//Twitter@matthewlasar

51 Reader Comments

I grew up around Chattanooga, and this is a good sign. They also just landed a VW assembly plant which will be a huge boost to the local economy. The prices seem kind of high, but will probably come down over time.

We have triple play at home (15 both ways for writer of article of above) and our savings from what we were paying is approximately $40 a month ceaper. Reliability, speed and service by EPB makes life so much better and we are fortunate to have the vision of the leadership of EPB to keep Chattanooga in 21st century.

Is there a usage cap? The Comcast services you mentioned are all capped at 250GB per month. You have to get a business class line to get uncapped usage, and those cost quite a bit more than their residential service.

We have triple play at home (15 both ways for writer of article of above) and our savings from what we were paying is approximately $40 a month ceaper. Reliability, speed and service by EPB makes life so much better and we are fortunate to have the vision of the leadership of EPB to keep Chattanooga in 21st century.

Ya but being funded in part by the city it should be at half the price.....

It's not funded by the city. They were already planning on rolling out fiber for a smart grid. They could afford to do that because of a federal grand that is supplying the funding for the smart grid meters. EPB sold bonds to fund the extra infrastructure to run the TV/phone/internet services over the fiber. None of the cost of this was subsidized by local tax dollars or by existing electrical services. That's how it got out of the Comcast lawsuits.

I'm a lifelong Chattanooga resident. The fiber was made available at my house recently, but I haven't signed up yet. Currently on a Comcast triple play, and I think the EPB TV doesn't play nice with TiVo.

The timing of this article is almost uncanny, as I've been watching EPB's contractors install fiber in my Chattanooga suburb for the last few weeks.

I think it's also worth mentioning that Comcast sued EPB in an attempt to kill the Fiber Optics project. I've been generally happy with Comcast's service both at the office and at home, but their legal shenanigans didn't win any points with me.

My company will be dumping our Comcast Business account as soon as EPB lights up the fiber outside our door.

EDIT: I obviously didn't read the article very thoroughly, as it already mentions the lawsuit.

It's not funded by the city. They were already planning on rolling out fiber for a smart grid. They could afford to do that because of a federal grand that is supplying the funding for the smart grid meters. EPB sold bonds to fund the extra infrastructure to run the TV/phone/internet services over the fiber. None of the cost of this was subsidized by local tax dollars or by existing electrical services. That's how it got out of the Comcast lawsuits.

I'm a lifelong Chattanooga resident. The fiber was made available at my house recently, but I haven't signed up yet. Currently on a Comcast triple play, and I think the EPB TV doesn't play nice with TiVo.

Meh still costs to much

I was in redbank for decades in chatown for 2 years and now in dunlap, I can;t tell if its an improvement or not...there are still random shots fires during the year LOL

I'm skeptical about these claimed speeds. For instance, A T & T's so-called Fast Access 'Ultra' DSL level that I pay for claims to provide speeds of 'up to' 1.5 MPS. The Speedtest website consistently shows a rate of 1.28 MPS or more, which would be fine and in the ballpark if true. But I've measured many downloads, from varied and major vendor websites, for lapsed time and they all consistently clock around 150 KPS, that is 150 kilobytes per second, 0.15 MPS, or 6 and 2/3 seconds per MB, or 9 MB per minute, more or less a tenth of the claimed download speed. Is everybody just making a little mistake with the decimal point?

I don't mind the speed I get, just don't want to pay for what I'm not getting, and don't want to submit to contemptible treatment as a customer.

I imagine Dunlap is outside of EPB's range, right? They had initially planned to connect their entire electrical service area with fiber within five years. I think we're only two years into that, so they're hitting the easy and profitable areas first (dense middle class suburbia). But Dunlap is probably too far out to even eventually get it.

I'm currently looking at buying a house, and that's one of my requirements. It doesn't have to have fiber now, but it has to be in the area that will get it in the next couple years.

I'm skeptical about these claimed speeds. For instance, A T & T's so-called Fast Access 'Ultra' DSL level that I pay for claims to provide speeds of 'up to' 1.5 MPS. The Speedtest website consistently shows a rate of 1.28 MPS or more, which would be fine and in the ballpark if true. But I've measured many downloads, from varied and major vendor websites, for lapsed time and they all consistently clock around 150 KPS, that is 150 kilobytes per second, 0.15 MPS, or 6 and 2/3 seconds per MB, or 9 MB per minute, more or less a tenth of the claimed download speed. Is everybody just making a little mistake with the decimal point?

I don't mind the speed I get, just don't want to pay for what I'm not getting, and don't want to submit to contemptible treatment as a customer.

Be aware that line speeds are advertised in bits and file sizes are in bytes, so your calculations are off by a factor of 8. 150 KB/s is 1200 Kb/s which jives with speed test.

I imagine Dunlap is outside of EPB's range, right? They had initially planned to connect their entire electrical service area with fiber within five years. I think we're only two years into that, so they're hitting the easy and profitable areas first (dense middle class suburbia). But Dunlap is probably too far out to even eventually get it.

I'm currently looking at buying a house, and that's one of my requirements. It doesn't have to have fiber now, but it has to be in the area that will get it in the next couple years.

That would be neat but unless they offer 50MB for 50$ a month or less I can;t afford it. ;_;

Am I the only person who got faster than advertised speeds consistently? At my old apartment I had 8mb Mediacom cable. The speed was reliable enough that I complained when I got less than 11mb, and I wasn't complaining very often. It was usually in the 12-14mb range. I know a friend of mine across the country who was paying for 12mb cable and consistently received 20mb+

Am I the only person who got faster than advertised speeds consistently? At my old apartment I had 8mb Mediacom cable. The speed was reliable enough that I complained when I got less than 11mb, and I wasn't complaining very often. It was usually in the 12-14mb range. I know a friend of mine across the country who was paying for 12mb cable and consistently received 20mb+

I think that's what Comcast advertises as "power boost" which isn't good for sustained transfers, and I always assumed was just a way to fake out all the speed test websites.

I'm not disappointed with my Comcast speeds. I have had some relatively minor reliability issues, though the biggest thing that appeals to me about fiber is the upload.

Dang, all this talk is making me jealous either way.... Paying over $80 a month for 1500/512 k dsl. I HAVE to have a landline to get this, the only isp available to me, so I include that 30 in the cost of the dsl, heck even without that its $50 for just the dsl, which is awful compared to any prices you guys mention.

Dang, all this talk is making me jealous either way.... Paying over $80 a month for 1500/512 k dsl. I HAVE to have a landline to get this, the only isp available to me, so I include that 30 in the cost of the dsl, heck even without that its $50 for just the dsl, which is awful compared to any prices you guys mention.

The symmetric nature of the access is interesting. For one thing, it helps enable cloud computing (storing info in the cloud becomes a lot easier to deal with at 15 Mbps) and video telecommunications (a 15 Mbps stream is plenty). A little pricey for the average user but if reliability is good you could potentially use skype and download most shows so as to cause your cable television and land-line phone needs disappear. Plus, as most people have a mobile phone, the need for a home phone has lessened. Therefore, for $50 plus a couple subscriptions (perhaps Netflix and Hulu once Hulu subscriptions are available) would cover all your entertainment needs. Not a bad deal.

This absolutely has to scare the crap out of Comcast and the like - they are soooo close to being made completely irrelevant.

Is there a usage cap? The Comcast services you mentioned are all capped at 250GB per month. You have to get a business class line to get uncapped usage, and those cost quite a bit more than their residential service.

Actually, Comcast's business services aren't much more expensive than the residential stuff - I have the 20/10 business service & pay $60/mo. The service is a quite a bit better than the residential side too.

I guess it depends on area - I'm sure places where Comcast has rolled out DOCSIS 3.0 have cheaper service than the rest of the country. In Houston, business class 16/2(the highest tier currently available) is $100. I'm paying $75 because I signed up when they were running a SOHO special.It's pretty good service; I get sustained speeds of 21/2.7 and use anywhere from 700GB to 1.5TB per month, and I've only had one outage in 8 months. Certainly worth the $10 increase over their pseudo 16/2 residential service.

well i live in the uk, we dont get FTTH but we get FTTN delivered via cable at the end. can only get a max speed of 50mbps unfortunately it costs alot more than ADSL. however maximum i can get on ADSL is 3mbps, even though the advertised speed is up to 20mbps. theres only one provider of fibre thats virgin media. 50mbps costs £28 (approx $40) a month if you have a phone line with them. line rental is an extra £12 (approx $17) then you have to pay for a phone package on top of that. Still much cheaper than these prices.

I really love the idea of symmetrical service especially at those speeds, but the prices seem unreasonably high to me. $70 for 20/20 and then jumping to $175 for 50/50. I can only assume they are trying to subsidize the cost on the backs of the consumers that want and can afford to pay more for the higher speeds. I can't imagine having enough disposable income to get the 150/150 service to a private residence, although that would be sweet.

I really love the idea of symmetrical service especially at those speeds, but the prices seem unreasonably high to me. $70 for 20/20 and then jumping to $175 for 50/50. I can only assume they are trying to subsidize the cost on the backs of the consumers that want and can afford to pay more for the higher speeds. I can't imagine having enough disposable income to get the 150/150 service to a private residence, although that would be sweet.

Subsidize? Paying for what you get is not a subsidy. Those prices are both exactly $3.50 per mbps.

I really love the idea of symmetrical service especially at those speeds, but the prices seem unreasonably high to me. $70 for 20/20 and then jumping to $175 for 50/50. I can only assume they are trying to subsidize the cost on the backs of the consumers that want and can afford to pay more for the higher speeds. I can't imagine having enough disposable income to get the 150/150 service to a private residence, although that would be sweet.

Subsidize? Paying for what you get is not a subsidy. Those prices are both exactly $3.50 per mbps.

That's my point, either the upper tier is paying too much or the lower tier is paying too little. Think of it this way, if I go to the grocery store and buy a pint of milk, it's a lot more per ounce than if I buy a gallon. If I'm buy FTTH service, then the max load should be the cheapest per unit, as that's what the capacity is built for. If I buy less than the max, then they overbuilt it for my needs, therefore I should be paying for capacity I'm not actually using. Which is to say, you should get a better price per unit the closer you get to the max capacity. And those prices suck in general. I'm paying $47 for 12/2 service with AT&T Uverse. Seems like a Fiber connection could give me a better deal than $70 bucks for 20/20